Email: [email protected]Direct line: 01403 215465 Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) Horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive – Tom Crowley Corporate & Democratic Services www.hastings.gov.uk/meetings Development Management (North) Committee Tuesday, 7th June, 2016 at 5.30 pm Conference Room, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham Councillors: John Bailey Andrew Baldwin Toni Bradnum Alan Britten Karen Burgess Peter Burgess John Chidlow Roy Cornell Christine Costin Leonard Crosbie Jonathan Dancer Matthew French Tony Hogben Ian Howard Liz Kitchen Adrian Lee Christian Mitchell Josh Murphy Godfrey Newman Brian O'Connell Connor Relleen Stuart Ritchie David Skipp Simon Torn Claire Vickers Tricia Youtan You are summoned to the meeting to transact the following business Agenda Page No. 1. Election of Chairman 2. Apologies for absence 3. Appointment of Vice-Chairman 4. To approve the time of meetings of the Committee for the ensuing year 5. Minutes 1 - 8 To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 10 th May 2016 6. Declarations of Members' Interests To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee 7. Announcements To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive Public Document Pack
Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RLTelephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) Horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive – Tom Crowley
You are summoned to the meeting to transact the following business
Agenda
Page No.
1. Election of Chairman2. Apologies for absence3. Appointment of Vice-Chairman4. To approve the time of meetings of the Committee for the ensuing year5. Minutes 1 - 8
To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 10th May 2016
6. Declarations of Members' InterestsTo receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee
7. AnnouncementsTo receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive
Public Document Pack
To consider the following reports of the Development Manager and to take such action thereon as may be necessary:8. Appeals
11. DC/15/2493 - The Paddock, Micklepage, Nuthurst Street (Ward: Nuthurst) 39 - 48
12. Urgent BusinessItems not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as urgent because of the special circumstances
Development Management (North) Committee 10 MAY 2016
Present: Councillors: Ian Howard (Vice-Chairman), John Bailey, Andrew Baldwin, Toni Bradnum, Karen Burgess, Peter Burgess, John Chidlow, Roy Cornell, Christine Costin, Leonard Crosbie, Matthew French, Tony Hogben, Adrian Lee, Christian Mitchell, Josh Murphy, Godfrey Newman, Stuart Ritchie and Tricia Youtan
Apologies: Councillors: Liz Kitchen, Alan Britten, Jonathan Dancer,
Brian O'Connell, Connor Relleen, David Skipp, Simon Torn and Claire Vickers
DCN/132 MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 5th April 2016 were amended to include an additional sentence to item DCN/121 (planning application DC/15/2435: land to the West of Bewbush, North of the A264, Faygate): “Members requested that the Cabinet Member and officers discuss with the developer with a view to a review of the access arrangements onto the Kilnwood Vale development”. The minutes, as amended, were approved as a correct record and signed by the chairman.
DCN/133 DECLARATIONS OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS
Member
Item Nature of Interest
Councillor Roy Cornell DC/15/2814 Personal and Prejudicial – he is the Cabinet Member for Waste, Recycling and Cleansing
DCN/134 ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements.
DCN/135 APPEALS Notice concerning the following appeals had been received:
1
Page 1
Agenda Item 5
Development Management (North) Committee 10 May 2016
DCN/135 Appeals (Cont.)
Appeals Lodged Written Representations/Household Appeals Service Ref No
Site Officer
Recommendation Committee Resolution
DC/15/1483 41, 43 and land to the rear of 45 Longfield Rd, Horsham Refuse
DCN/136 DC/15/2814 - HOP OAST DEPOT, WORTHING ROAD, HORSHAM (WARD:
SOUTHWATER) APPLICANT: HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL (Councillor Roy Cornell declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application as he was the Cabinet Member for Waste, Recycling and Cleansing. He withdrew from the meeting and took no part in the determination of the application.) The Development Manager reported that this application sought permission for the redevelopment of the Hop Oast refuse and recycling depot site, including the demolition of workshop and offices facilities, and the erection of a new refuse and recycling vehicle depot comprising a mechanics workshop for servicing refuse vehicles and single storey offices with staff facilities. Some unprotected trees had previously been removed to make way for the proposal. The existing oil tank, on the North West boundary, would be replaced with a buried fuel tank within a ‘refuel zone’ in the North East corner of the site. There would also be a secure bin store located within the South West corner of the site. The parking areas would be re-configured with 40 bays for refuse vehicles, six car parking spaces, a disabled parking bay, an electric car charge point and a cycle storage shelter. An improved pedestrian link to the Park & Ride site, where staff would be able to park, would be provided. Vehicles would enter the site from the East side and exit it via a new vehicular egress to the North (opposite the Park & Ride facility), allowing for a one way system. The application site was located outside the built up area and formed part of a commercial site close to the strategic road network at the interception of the A24 Worthing Road and B2227 Hop Oast Roundabout between the current ‘Park and Ride’ facility to the North, the Household Waste recycling facility to the West and the Shell Petrol Station to the South.
3 Page 3
Development Management (North) Committee 10 May 2016
DCN/136 Planning Application: DC/15/2814 (Cont.)
The nearest residential properties were approximately half a mile South of the site. The area surrounding the application site was largely industrial and commercial and the nearest buildings were warehouses or farm buildings. The boundary of the site was enclosed by trees and vegetation of varying heights adjacent to the eight metre chain link fence around the perimeter. Details of relevant government and council policies and planning history, as printed in the report, were noted by the Committee. The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. The Environment Agency had confirmed that they supported the application, subject to conditions. The Parish Council had raised no objection in principle and commented on the application. The Horsham District Cycling Forum welcomed the cycle parking facilities but commented on cycling safety issues along the Worthing Road. There had been no further representations received. Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of the development and its environmental impact; design; its effect on the amenity of neighbouring residents; highways and traffic; whether the economic justification for the expansion of the existing business would outweigh the proposed encroachment into the countryside; and the requirements of economic and environmental policies within the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF). Members welcomed the proposal, which was in accord with the overarching policies of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and policies within the HDPF.
RESOLVED That planning application DC/15/2814 be granted subject to the conditions and reasons as reported.
DCN/137 DC/15/2569 - PARK FARM BUNGALOW, SEDGWICK PARK, HORSHAM
(WARD: NUTHURST) APPLICANT: MR AND MRS S AND J PALMER The Development Manager reported that this application sought to discharge the Section 106 agreement attached to planning permission DC/07/0951. The legal agreement had previously been modified under DC/15/2014 (Minute No. DCN/71 (03.11.15) refers). Members were reminded that the Committee had granted permission for DC/07/0951, subject to the completion of a legal agreement, in August 2007 for
4 Page 4
Development Management (North) Committee 10 May 2016
5
DCN/137 Planning Application: DC/15/2569 (Cont.)
the ‘demolition of farm buildings and stables, removal of mobile home and erection of dwelling with garage and inclusion of some land within the curtilage of Park Farm Bungalow’. The legal agreement bound the land, which comprised two titles in two different ownerships, so that any subsequent permission would have to comply with the terms of the original legal agreement or require a variation of that agreement. This application would remove restrictions within the legal agreement and also allow the determination of two outstanding planning applications submitted under DC/13/ 0670 (proposed sand school for private use) and DC/13/2025 (retention of hardstanding, walls and fencing), which had not been determined because amendments to the legal agreement could not be agreed by all parties. The application site was within a rural area included in the register of Parks and Gardens of special historic interest in England. It was on the South side of a private drive serving Sedgwick Park from Sedgwick Lane. Park Farm Cottage and Park House were immediately to the South within Sedgwick Park and, along with Park Farm Bungalow, formed part of a modest cluster of sporadic development in this rural parkland setting. Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The consultation response from the Council’s Legal Team, as contained within the report, was considered by the Committee. The Parish Council had raised no objection. Seven letters of objection, five letters of support and one letter commenting on the proposal had been received. One member of the public spoke in objection to the application, and the applicant and the applicant’s agent both addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issue for consideration in determining the proposal were the problems that had been identified with the legal agreement, and whether the legal agreement still served a useful planning purpose. It was noted that any future development would be controlled through future planning applications. Members concluded that the Section 106 agreement no longer served a useful planning purpose and agreed that the proposal was acceptable.
RESOLVED That the Section 106 Agreement dated 16th September 2008, as modified by DC/15/2014, is discharged and the entry relating to it is removed from the local land charges register maintained by the Council.
5 Page 5
Development Management (North) Committee 10 May 2016
DCN/138 DC/16/0138 - WATER FARM, BASHURST HILL, ITCHINGFIELD, HORSHAM (WARD: ITCHINGFIELD, SLINFOLD & WARNHAM) APPLICANT: MESSRS RIMER, HAYES AND CRAWFORD The Development Manager reported that this application sought planning permission for the erection of three detached live-work units and associated works. The application had been submitted because previous permissions had allowed for the conversion of chicken sheds which had now been demolished; the current application was for new live-work units which were larger in scale to the previously permitted DC/13/0289 which had only allowed for partial demolition and conversion of the buildings. The current application had been submitted to address this breach of the previous permission and to regularise the situation. The application site was located outside the built-up area approximately 3.6 kilometres South-West of Broadbridge Heath. It was South-East of Bashurst Hill in an area of open countryside with sporadic residential and farm buildings along Bashurst Hill. The closest dwelling, which was to the North West, shared the approach road to the site. There was a public footpath to the West and a line of protected mature oak trees to the South West.
Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The responses from internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. The Parish Council had raised no objection to the application. Six letters of support had been received. Two of the applicants, and the applicant’s agent, addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the planning history of the site in the context of the size and scale of the proposal; the principle of development, which was a departure from the Council’s adopted development plan; amenity; highways and parking; and the requirement of a demonstrated demand for economic development. Members considered the planning history of the site, which had allowed for partial demolition and conversion of the buildings, and discussed the structural condition of those buildings which were reported to have had inadequate foundations to support the approved structures. Members considered the approved DC/13/0289 not to be significantly different to the current proposal, and agreed that it would not have an adverse impact on the amenity or visual character of the surrounding area. Members weighed the policy considerations regarding new development in the countryside against the benefits of the proposed live-work units in the context of the previously granted live-work units and concluded that, because of the special circumstances, the proposal was acceptable.
6 Page 6
Development Management (North) Committee 10 May 2016
7
DCN/138 Planning Application: DC/16/0138 (Cont.)
RESOLVED That planning application DC/16/0138 be determined by the Development Manager for the framing of conditions. The view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.
DCN/139 DC/15/2860 - STUBBONS, LYNWICK STREET, RUDGWICK, HORSHAM (WARD: RUDGWICK) APPLICANT: MR DAVID LUGET The Development Manager reported that this application sought retrospective planning permission for the retention of a timber framed lych gate and a timber framed vehicular access gate. The lych gate was the main pedestrian access to the listed building and included a pitched roof constructed of timber with a clay tile roof to match the main roof of the house, and the roof of the car port. The vehicular gate replaced a previously approved gate. The application site was located outside the built-up area on the Eastern side of Lynwick Street. The site included a detached two-storey 16th century timber-framed grade II listed dwelling. There was a large garden, with a timber car port to the north. The surrounding area was characterised by large detached dwellings of different designs, some of which were listed, with varying boundary treatments. Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. The Parish Council had raised no objection to the application. Twelve letters of support and one letter of objection had been received. The Rudgwick Preservation Society had commented that the gate was contrary to the Rudgwick Parish Design Statement. The applicant addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issue for consideration in determining the proposal was the impact of the lych gate on the setting of the listed building. The vehicular gate was considered to be acceptable in this location. Members discussed the scale and appearance of the lych gate and the extent of its visual impact on the listed building and locality. After careful consideration Members concluded that, on balance, the proposal was acceptable.
7 Page 7
Development Management (North) Committee 10 May 2016
DCN/139 Planning Application: DC/15/2860 (Cont.)
RESOLVED That planning application DC/15/2860 be determined by the Development Manager for the framing of conditions. The view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.
The meeting closed at 6.46 pm having commenced at 5.30 pm
CHAIRMAN
8 Page 8
ITEM A01 - 1
Contact Officer: Jason Hawkes Tel: 01403 215162
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee (North)
BY: Development Manager
DATE: 7 June 2016
DEVELOPMENT: Erection of a new cold storage warehouse
SITE: Fisher Clinical Services UK Ltd, Langhurst Wood Road, Horsham, West Sussex
WARD: Holbrook West
APPLICATION: DC/16/0564
APPLICANT: Fisher Clinical Services
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Departure from the Development Plan
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be delegated for approval to the Development Manager, subject to completion of a Legal Agreement and appropriate conditions
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
1.1 To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.2 Planning permission is sought for the construction of a large detached warehouse building located to the north of Fisher Clinical Services. The building would provide an additional 12,648 sqm of gross internal floorspace and would be used mainly as a cold store warehouse. The building would include three floors and includes additional office space, plant rooms and ancillary accommodation for Fisher Clinical Services (FCS).
1.3 The main body of the building would be rectangular shaped with a ground floor area of approximately 132m by 52m. This would form the main cold store warehouse and would be three-storeys tall with a curved roof. It would have a height of 11.4m to the eaves, and 13.4m to the ridge of the roof. The building includes a smaller flat roofed three-storey addition to the south which would form the goods in and out area to the warehouse at ground floor with accommodation above. This addition would have a ground floor area of approximately 62m x 25m.
1.4 An additional single-storey extension is proposed to the east side of the warehouse which would be used for plant and machinery. This addition would have a ground floor area of approximately 14m x 56m and would have a flat roof. Additional external plant and machinery is proposed along the north elevation of the warehouse. The building is proposed in dark and light grey profiled metal cladding with powder coated aluminium framed windows to match the existing building.
Page 9
Agenda Item 9
ITEM A01 - 2
1.5 The building would be set into the existing ground. This would lower the overall height of the building when viewed from the surrounding area and involves excavation works. Vehicles, staff and visitors would gain access via the existing access to the site from Langhurstwood Road. The scheme includes an additional 96 car parking spaces which would expand the existing car park for FCS. The new access road, car park and goods in / out area would also be set at a lower ground level in line with the new warehouse building. The scheme requires new land works along the northern part of the site.
1.6 Currently, a temporary cold store is located immediately adjacent to the proposed site. The applicant has stated that this will remain in use until the facility is built and in use, and will then be removed. The applicant has also stated that three other temporary cold stores containers around the site will be removed once the new warehouse is in use.
1.7 The scheme would involve the loss of 5 trees to accommodate the proposal. The trees are all Category C trees and are a mix of Silver Birch, Oak and Willow. The scheme would retain the remaining trees around the site and proposes additional landscaping around the new warehouse building and within the site.
1.8 The application has been accompanied by a number of supporting documents including: Arboricultural Impact Survey Arboricultural Method Statement Deep Borehole Survey Design and Access Statement Economic Statement Environmental Impact Screening Environmental Noise Assessment Sustainability and Energy Statement Flood Risk Assessment Geo-Environmental Assessment Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal Preliminary Ecology Appraisal Travel Plan Travel Statement
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.9 The application site relates to Fisher Clinical Services (FCS). FCS Horsham is a company who specialise in the handling of all types of clinical supplies and pharmaceuticals. This includes the cold storage of clinical supplies on site as well as packaging, labelling and distribution. The company occupy a large commercial building which is part of a large industrial site off Langhurstwood Road. The estate was established in the 1970’s and FCS took over the site in the early 1990s. The company currently employ 715 people. The site is accessed via Langhurstwood Road, which leads directly to the A264 to the south.
1.10 The FCS building is located on the west side of the industrial estate adjacent to a railway line which runs north to south. Brookhurst Wood Landfill site lies to the south of site and separate office buildings are to the east of the FCS building. These buildings are part of the Broadlands Business Campus. The existing site includes approximately 202 parking spaces and there is a goods in and out area for HGVs on the south side of the main building. The building is modern in design, two-storeys high with black metal cladding and a flat roof. The estate includes numerous mature trees which for the most part surround the FCS building. This includes a large area of trees and open space to the north section of the site set at a slightly higher ground level than the car park and main FCS building. None of the existing trees are protected by tree preservation orders.
Page 10
ITEM A01 - 3
1.11 The FCS site includes a large area of open scrubland to the north of the main building. This area was former landfill and is generally flat. This piece of land is also set at a higher ground level than the main building and is the proposed site for the new warehouse building. The scrubland area is approximately 2.3ha in size. A large temporary store is currently placed on this piece of land. It should also be noted that FCS have a number of other temporary storage buildings sited around their site. The northern piece of land is adjacent to a large mound to the west which separates the site from the railway line. The scrubland is also adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The northern boundary includes dense vegetation and trees and slopes down to a stream. This section of the site is a flood risk area (Zone 2). Open fields lie to the north of the site which stretch up from the site from south to north.
1.12 The site is within North Horsham Parish and is also adjacent to boundaries with Rusper Parish to the north and Warnham Parish to the west. The site is outside any built-up boundary as defined by the HDPF.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), sections 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12.
2.3 Planning Practice Guidance (March 2014).
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.4 The following policies in the HDPF are considered to be relevant:
Policy 1: Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2: Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3: Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 4: Strategic Policy: Settlement Expansion
Policy 7: Strategic Policy: Economic GrowthPolicy 9: Employment Development
Policy 10: Rural Economic Development Policy 24: Strategic Policy – Environmental Protection Policy 25: Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26: Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 31: Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32: Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33: Development Principles Policy 35: Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36: Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use
Policy 37: Sustainable Construction Policy 38: Strategic Policy: Flooding Policy 39: Strategic Policy: Infrastructure Provision Policy 40: Sustainable Transport Policy 41: Parking 2.5 Local Development Framework: Supplementary Planning Document:
Page 11
ITEM A01 - 4
- Planning Obligations (2007)
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
2.6 The site is within the parish of North Horsham. North Horsham is not designated as a Neighbourhood Plan Area.
DC/08/1808 Erection of a single-storey portacabin for office (Class B1(a)) use for a temporary period of 2 years
Permitted
DC/09/0328 Installation of an external emergency exit staircase to the Goods In area and removal of existing internal staircase.
Permitted
DC/09/0407 Installation of a temporary portakabin tea room Permitted
DC/10/1890 Variation of condition No.1 of DC/08/1808 to allow continued use of temporary portacabin
Permitted
DC/11/2075 Erection of a fire protection pump house and two water storage tanks
Permitted
DC/12/1023 Retention of single-storey tea room portacabin (previous reference DC/09/0407)
Permitted
DC/12/1867 Variation of Condition 1 of DC/10/1890 to allow continued use (two years) of a temporary portacabin
Permitted
DC/13/1473 Erection of a new security entrance and altered access arrangements, including associated works
Permitted
DC/14/1465 Retention of a single-storey tea room portacabin (Reference DC/09/0407)
Permitted
DC/14/1469 Variation of condition 1of DC/10/1890 to allow continued use (two years) of a temporary portacabin
Permitted
DC/14/1715 Installation of a generator Permitted
DC/15/0016 Construction of two dock loading enclosures to south west elevation and alterations to the service yard and car park
Permitted
DISC/15/0215 Discharge of condition 4 on DC/15/0016 Permitted
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Where consultation responses have been summarised, it should be noted that Officers have had consideration of the full comments received, which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk.
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.2 HDC – Arboricultural Officer (verbal comment): No objection.
3.3 HDC – Drainage Engineer: No objection subject to the submission of a detailed drainage strategy prior to commencement of works for the approval of the Local Planning Authority.
3.4 HDC – Ecology Consultant (summarised): No objection subject to the following:
Page 12
ITEM A01 - 5
Submission of an Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan for the approval of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with Phase 1 reports submitted by The Ecology Partnership. The plan shall include measures for protected species, reptiles, nesting birds, rabbits and invasive species.
Submission of a Lighting Strategy to reduce impacts on foraging and commuting bats for the approval of the Local Planning Authority.
3.5 HDC – Economic Development (summarised): Support. The application to improve and extend this business is supported in order to secure the long term future of the business within Horsham District and help create further employment opportunities.
3.6 HDC – EIA Screening Assessment Officer (summarised): No objection. An additional Environmental Impact Assessment is not required for this scheme.
3.7 HDC – Environmental Health (summarised): No objection.
3.8 HDC – Environment Management (summarised): No objection.
3.9 HDC – Landscape Consultant (summarised): No objection. The proposal will be well screened with existing vegetation and proposed buffer planting. More details are required of the proposed planting which can be secured through landscape conditions.
3.10 HDC – Leisure Services: No comment.
3.11 HDC - Parks and Countryside: No comment.
3.12 HDC - Strategic Planning (summarised): No objection to the principle. Taking into account Policies 7 and 9 of the HDPF in particular, it is considered that subject to other detailed planning considerations (e.g. flood risk) being acceptable, the proposed development in this specific location on balance outweighs the wider policy requirements of Policy 3 which focusses development within the most sustainable settlements.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.13 Environment Agency (summarised): No objection subject to suitable drainage details to be submitted.
3.14 Horsham District Cycle Forum (summarised): Comment. No cycle parking is shown on the proposed drawings. The scheme should meet the minimum standards required for cycle provision. Facilities on the narrow lanes need to be improved for cycle access.
3.15 Natural England (summarised): No objection. The proposal is unlikely to affect any statutory protected sites or landscapes.
3.16 Network Rail (summarised): Comment. Operations for works adjoining Network Rail land must be in accordance with Network Rail’s requirements for the safe operation of the railway.
3.17 Southern Water (summarised): No objection subject to the submission of a formal application for connection and on-site mains to be made by the applicant or developer. A condition is also recommended that no development shall take place until details of a drainage strategy for the proposed means of foul and surface water sewerage and surface water has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water.
Page 13
ITEM A01 - 6
3.18 Sussex Police (summarised): No objection.
3.19 West Sussex County Council – Flood Risk Management Consultant (summarised): No objection. Development should not commence until finalised detailed surface water drainage designs for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3.20 West Sussex County Council – Highways (summarised): No objection. The predicted increase in traffic would be relatively low and within capacity of the road. Within 3 months of the development being commenced, a Green Travel Plan should be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
3.21 West Sussex County Council – Strategic Planning (summarised): Based on the increase in floor space and the additional 96 car parking spaces, a contribution of £75,000 is required towards improvements to sustainable transport infrastructure.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.22 Langhurstwood Road Residents Group: Object. The grounds of objection are as follows:
Ever increasing traffic along a country lane that is already traffic saturated with resultant risk to health and safety to pedestrians and cyclists.
No issue is raised with the buildings, fixed plant proposed or the creation of jobs. The Transport Statement does not address the true traffic flows along
Langhurstwood Road. Concern is raised that the Travel Plan will be meaningless. If minded to grant, FCS must deposit oversite spoil from the site at the Biffa Landfill
site.
3.23 North Horsham Parish Council: No objection. Concern is raised at the resultant increase in traffic movements causing nuisance to residents and danger to pedestrians. The comments of the Cycle Forum are supported.
3.24 Rusper Parish Council (adjacent Parish): No objection. The Parish would ask that employees continue to use the A264 for access.
3.25 Warnham Parish Council (adjacent Parish): No objection subject to the roof of the new warehouse being a matt surface finish coloured to minimise visual impact.
3.26 No comments have been received from any adjacent properties or members of the public regarding this proposal.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder. Due to the nature of the business, FCS has strict security measures in place. Sussex Police have recommended that the company’s present security measures are incorporated into the new development.
Page 14
ITEM A01 - 7
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 This application is assessed against the relevant policies in the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) adopted on 27 November 2015 and the national planning policies contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
6.2 The main issues for the Local Planning Authority to consider in the determination of this application are the acceptability of the principle of the proposed development in land use terms; the appearance and design of the proposal and its wider impact on the character and visual amenity of the landscape and locality; the impact of the development on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; increased traffic movements and parking, sustainability, refuse storage/collection, drainage/flooding and whether the development can be delivered without harming the interests of nature conservation.
Principle of Development
6.3 The existing industrial estate is outside any built-up area as identified in the HDPF and is not allocated as a Key Employment Area. The HDPF seeks to focus growth within defined built-up area boundaries (Policy 3) with the countryside protected against inappropriate development (Policy 26). As such, given the location of the proposed building, the scheme is considered as a departure from the Local Plan.
6.4 The overall policy approach of the HDPF is to steer expansion of employment sites within existing settlements rather than those located away from these settlements. Given the lack of existing floorspace, the Council will be seeking to allocate additional land for employment development through the forthcoming Site Allocations document, for which evidence gathering has now commenced. In advance of this document, the Council recognises that there is still a need to support existing businesses and help to deliver economic development as identified in the NPPF, and that the shortfall of employment land has the potential to prevent local businesses from growing.
6.5 To this end, the HDPF encourages economic development and the growth of existing businesses within the District. Economic development is covered by Chapter 5 of the HDPF. Chapter 5 states that ‘there need to be opportunities for existing businesses to grow and expand and change to meet modern business demands’. Policy 7 (Economic Growth) goes on to say that sustainable employment development in Horsham district for the period up to 2031 will be achieved by the ‘redevelopment, regeneration, intensification and smart growth of existing employment sites.’
6.6 FCS currently employs 715 people and is one of the District’s largest employers. FCS has stated that once the new cold store facility is fully operational, an additional 40 full time staff will be recruited. The company has experienced an unprecedented period of growth over the past few years. Due to the increase in demand, the company has been running out of storage space and has had to site temporary storage containers to accommodate demand. FCS has stated that they are now at stage where they need more storage space and that their existing site, including the temporary storage containers, will be soon be inadequate for their needs. Consequently, permission is sought for the current proposal for a new cold store warehouse. With the new cold store warehouse in place, the applicant has stated that the large temporary store to the north of the main building and three other temporary stores around the building can be removed as they would no longer be required. The applicant has stated that the proposal would secure the long term future of FCS on this site as an employer for the District.
6.7 Whilst the proposal is not within a Key Employment Site or a defined built-up area, the proposal is still within the confines of an established industrial site and accords with the objectives of the HDPF to encourage existing businesses to grow and expand. Additionally, the proposal is encouraged on the basis that it would result in additional jobs
Page 15
ITEM A01 - 8
(not including temporary jobs for construction works) for the benefit of FCS and the District as a whole. The scheme is also in accordance with the NPPF requirement to support existing businesses. On this basis, it is felt that the principle of development for a new cold store is supported in this location and outweighs the wider policy requirement to focus development within established settlements. This is subject to compliance with other relevant considerations, such as design and highway impacts as outlined below. The scheme is therefore considered in accordance with Policy 7 of the HDPF and also complies with the objectives of Chapter 5 of the HDPF on Economic Growth.
Design and Visual Impact
6.8 The site for the new warehouse is former landfill, located to the north of the main FCS building. This area is mainly flat scrubland surrounded by trees. It is considered that this site is an appropriate location for a new building for FCS as it would result in minimal loss of trees and would be well screened. The proposal is for a large building which would have an overall length of 147m and be up to 76m in width. The main section of the building is three-storeys tall with a curved roof with an eaves height of 11.4m and an overall height of 13.4m to the ridge of the roof. The building would be set approximately 38m away from the main building.
6.9 To reduce the visual impact of the proposed building, the scheme proposes to set the building at a lower ground level through excavation works (5m at the deepest point). With the building set at a lower ground level, the building would be comparable to the height of the main FCS building. The new warehouse building is also proposed with a finish of profiled metal sheets and in a modern design which would match the existing FCS building’s design and finish.
6.10 The scheme would also retain a large number of trees around the building and on site. Additional trees and landscaping are also proposed around the building and the site. With the proposed and existing trees and landscaping in place and, given the design of the proposed building, the new warehouse would not stand out as an inappropriate addition in the context of this site.
6.11 It should also be noted that the proposal would result in the removal of four temporary stores around the FCS building which would no longer be required once the new store is operational. This includes a large store located to the north of the site. The removal of these stores would tidy up the site. The applicant has agreed to the removal of the stores within 6 months of the occupation of the new cold store. To ensure the removal of the stores, a condition is recommended requiring the removal of the four temporary stores, as shown on the submitted drawing, within six months of the occupation of the new cold store.
6.12 In the context of the wider area, the scheme is also considered appropriate. The proposal would not be readily visible from the south, east and west of the industrial estate. To the south, there is a large landfill site currently undergoing works. Set to the north of the main FCS building, the new warehouse would not be readily visible or stand out as an inappropriate addition in the context of the industrial estate. The east of the site comprises other industrial buildings which are part of this commercial site. In this context, the new build would be visually appropriate. The building would be adjacent to the western boundary of the site with a railway line. This boundary includes a large mound and numerous trees which would effectively shield the new warehouse from views to the west.
6.13 This leaves the visual impact of the proposal when viewed from the north. Due to the topography of the area, this would be where the proposed warehouse building could have the most visual impact when viewed from the surrounding area. From the site, the northern boundary slopes down to a stream and then climbs up northwards where there are open fields for approximately a kilometre. This results in views of the site from the north although these views would be mitigated by substantial trees along the boundary. The
Page 16
ITEM A01 - 9
scheme includes a Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal Statement to address this visual impact.
6.14 To reduce the visual impact of the proposal, the proposed warehouse has been set back from the northern boundary by approximately 15m. This set back allows substantial landscaping, including new trees, to be placed along the northern boundary on a new land mound. The Council’s Consultant Landscape Officer has commented that with the proposed and existing landscaping and trees in place, the proposal would be well screened. To ensure the proposed building is well screened, a condition is recommended requiring full details of all landscaping proposed including a landscape management plan to ensure that the landscaping is sufficient and meets its requirement in screening the north elevation of the proposed warehouse building from view.
6.15 The proposed materials are intended to strike a balance in terms of fitting in with the context and ensuring an appropriate appearance, both within the site and when viewed from further afield. The use of dark grey finished powder coated profiled metal cladding to the main stores would mitigate the visual impact of the proposal as the building would blend in with the shadows generated by the boundary tree screen. Additionally, the curved roof in a mid-grey finish would allow the roof to blend into the skyline to some degree. As amended, the windows facing north have also been changed from blue framed windows to grey framed windows. This also reduces the visual impact of the proposal when viewed from the north.
6.16 The proposal also includes an additional 96 car parking spaces and new roads to allow access to the new building. The new spaces would form an extension to the existing car park for FCS and would result in the loss of an area of open space. With the new car park in place, the site would still retain a large area of open space and mature trees to the north. Given this, the additional spaces are visually appropriate and would not detract from the appearance of the site.
6.17 Overall, the scheme is considered visually appropriate. Whilst large, the new warehouse would form a sympathetic addition in the context of this site and would match the appearance of the existing main FCS building. Additionally, with the proposed landscaping and existing vegetation, the visual impact of the new building would not be overly prominent when viewed from the surrounding area. The scheme is therefore in accordance with Policies 25, 26 and 33 of the HDPF.
Impact on Amenity
6.18 The new building is set within the confines of the industrial estate and there are no immediate residential properties that would be affected by this proposal in relation to loss of light, outlook or an increased sense of enclosure. The nearest residential properties are located on the opposite side of the railway line to the west of the site at 1 and 2 Gunbarn Crossing Cottages. Separated by the railway line, lines of mature trees and land mound, the cottages are not able to see the industrial estate and would not be affected by the proposal. The proposed building is also set a significant distance from the nearest office building to the east.
6.19 The current FCS building includes a number of external plant for the cold storage facilities. On site, it was clear that the noise generated from this is minimal and it is envisaged that this will be the same situation with the new plant and machinery proposed, as confirmed within the submitted Noise Impact Assessment. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has confirmed that the Noise Impact Assessment is acceptable. The Environmental Health Officer confirms that there are no objections in relation to potential land contamination for this site. An informative is recommended advising the applicant to cease works and contact the Local Planning Authority immediately if any unknown contaminants are found on site during construction works.
Page 17
ITEM A01 - 10
6.20 The Environmental Health Officer has also commented that there may be adverse impacts
during construction and demolition phases on account of construction traffic, noise and dust generation. In order to minimise these impacts a condition requiring a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to be submitted prior to demolition and construction activities taking place forms part of this recommendation.
6.21 In relation to opening hours, the existing facility is required to be operational 24 hours a day in order to maintain the cold storage facilities. The applicant has stated that the main deliveries and collections are made during the day in normal working hours. Due to the necessity of cold storage some hauliers are required to arrive in the early hours but this is stated as being unusual. Having regard to the existing hours of operation of the business and its requirement to remain operational and manned for 24 hours, it would be unreasonable to impose hours of operation on the new warehouse building which hinder operations. Additionally, the proposed increase in traffic resulting from this development is considered minimal as outlined below.
6.22 Having regard to the above and subject to the submission of an appropriate CEMP for the approval of the Local Planning Authority, the scheme would not result in a significant impact on the amenity of any adjacent properties and is in accordance with Policy 33 of the HDPF.
Highway Considerations
6.23 In terms of transport and highway impacts, the scheme includes 90 additional parking spaces to be provided. With the new warehouse building in place, it is envisaged that the proposal would increase traffic movements to and from the site. Following pre-application discussions with West Sussex County Council Highways, a Transport Statement has been submitted in support of the proposed development along with a draft Travel Plan.
6.24 From a highways and transport viewpoint, WSCC is aware that a number of local residents have raised concerns about the increasing volume of HGV traffic using Langhurstwood Road in recent years. It is understood that this is mainly related to noise and dust pollution and is primarily associated with the HGV traffic visiting the waste management and brickworks sites. Whilst it is appreciated that the Broadlands Business Park site to the north does generate a high level of traffic during the peak hours, the majority of this is car rather than HGV traffic.
6.25 WSCC are seeking to address residents’ concerns about HGV traffic as part of the allocated North Horsham strategic development site where a new road link is proposed to take HGV’s away from the worst affected dwellings. However, the delivery of this new road link is still some years away. There have also been concerns expressed about traffic using the northern section of Langhurstwood Road which is unsuitable for HGV’s and only really suitable for occasional light traffic.
6.26 The Transport Statement outlines traffic counts taken on Langhurstwood Road near its junction with the A264. This indicates that the road currently accommodates some 6,029 traffic movements per day of which 212 are HGV’s. This count was taken just south of the FCS site. Manual traffic counts at the site access indicate that the FCS site currently generates some 416 vehicle movements per day of which only 12 are HGV’s. According to the applicant, the proposed new warehouse unit will generate a further 97 car movements and 6 HGV movements per day. However, due to shift working most of these movements would be spread out over the day and would not necessarily occur during the busier peak hours. The predicted increase in traffic would therefore be relatively low and within the capacity of the road.
Page 18
ITEM A01 - 11
6.27 The applicant has also indicated that it would be prepared to implement a Green Travel Plan which should help negate some of traffic increase by staff and a draft plan has been submitted with the application. The main alternative transport options in the plan would be using staff mini-buses and by car sharing. West Sussex County Council Travel Plan Officer has commented that an amended Green Travel Plan is required to fully address their standards. Consequently, a condition is recommended requiring the submission of an amended Travel Plan for the approval of the Local Planning Authority.
6.28 In terms of car parking for Use Class B8 warehousing, the maximum car parking standard is 1 space per 100sq.m. The application proposes 96 extra parking spaces, which is considered acceptable as it meets the applicant’s needs in respect of its shift working operations, including shift changeover periods when parking demand is usually at its highest.
6.29 In summary, WSCC do not raise any objections to this development proposal subject to the submission and approval of a Green Travel Plan and a S106 contribution towards improving sustainable access to the site (as outlined below).
6.30 Horsham District Cycle Forum has raised concerns regarding the lack of cycle storage facilities for the site. The site is in an isolated location where access by pedestrians and cyclists is limited. However, it is felt that cycle provision should be encouraged to reduce the reliance on cars. The applicant has stated that cycle provision will be covered by its Green Travel Plan which will outline measures to promote cycle use to and from the site. This is considered an acceptable approach.
Sustainability
6.31 Policies 35, 36 and 37 of the HDPF require development to be designed to meet the impacts of a changing climate, to incorporate renewable technologies and to be built to a high standard of sustainability. To address these requirements, the scheme includes a Sustainability and Energy Statement. The statement outlines measures to ensure the development is energy efficient such as a providing a thermally efficient building with energy efficient light fittings, water fittings and energy efficient air conditioning and refrigeration units.
6.32 A condition is recommended that details are submitted to indicate that the new building meets the BREEAM rating of ‘very good’ for new commercial buildings. Subject to these conditions, the scheme would meet the requirements of the above policies and is considered as sustainable development.
Ecology
6.33 In terms of ecology, the scheme includes a Preliminary Ecology Appraisal of the site which addressed potential ecological impacts of the proposal. This has been followed up by additional surveys for protected species as required by the Council’s Consultant Ecologist. The Council’s Consultant Ecologist has commented that they have no objection to the proposal subject to the submission of an Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan and a Lighting Strategy for the approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of works.
6.34 The Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan shall include details of mitigation measures prior to construction, during and post construction, and will summarise recommendations made in all protected species and Phase one reports by The Ecology Partnership. The plan will include measures with regards to protected species, reptiles, nesting birds, rabbits and invasive species. The lighting strategy shall outline measures to reduce impacts on foraging and commuting bats. Subject to these conditions, the scheme
Page 19
ITEM A01 - 12
is considered appropriate with respect to ecology and is in accordance with Policy 25 of the HDPF.
Drainage and Flooding
6.35 The site is located within Flood Zone 1 where there is a low probability of flooding and where commercial development is considered acceptable by the NPPF. A Flood Risk Zone 2 lies adjacent the site to the north. Southern Water, West Sussex County Council and the Council’s Drainage Engineer have all raised no objection to this proposal, subject to the use of a condition requiring the submission and approval of details relating to the proposed means of foul and surface water drainage for the site. Subject to this condition, the scheme is in accordance with Policy 38 of the HDPF.
Refuse
6.36 The Council’s Waste Collection Supervisor has commented that details are required of how the proposal will deal with trade and recycling waste. No details regarding refuse provision for the development have been submitted. A condition is therefore recommended requiring details of refuse and recycling storage facilities to be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the building.
Impact on Trees
6.37 The proposal would result in the loss of five trees on site to accommodate the development. The affected trees are 1 x Silver Birch, 1 x Oak and 3 x Willow. All of the trees are Category C trees, these are trees considered to be of lower value and not protected by a tree preservation order. The proposal would retain a significant number of mature trees around the site and also includes new planting. The Council’s Arboricultural Officer has confirmed that he has no objection with the proposal and that the loss of the trees is acceptable. The scheme includes an Arboricultural Method Statement which outlines protection measures for trees to be retained on site. The scheme is considered acceptable subject to the implementation of the Arboricultural Method Statement and is in accordance with Policy 33 of the HDPF.
Infrastructure contribution
6.38 Policy 39 of the HDPF requires new development to meet its infrastructure needs. For this development, contributions would be required towards transport infrastructure and highway improvements in the surrounding area. This would mitigate the impact of the development on the existing highway network. West Sussex County Council has commented that given the scale of development and the additional parking spaces proposed, a contribution of £75,000 is required to be spent on sustainable access improvements, to include pedestrian, cycle and public transport improvements between the development site and Horsham Town.
6.39 The applicant has confirmed a willingness to enter into a legal agreement to secure the necessary sums and is currently in discussions with West Sussex County Council regarding the proposed amount and how this would be spent. Consequently, permission is recommended subject to the completion of a S106 agreement to secure an agreed contribution towards transport infrastructure and highway improvements in the surrounding area.
Conclusion
6.40 Within the confines of an established industrial site, the principle of encouraging the expansion and growth of an existing business is acceptable. The scheme would also result in a sympathetic and appropriate addition in the context of this commercial site and
Page 20
ITEM A01 - 13
surrounding area and would result in an acceptable impact on the amenity of adjacent properties. The proposal is also considered appropriate with respect to its impact on demand for travel and highway considerations, trees, sustainability, ecology and flooding.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 That planning permission be delegated for approval to the Development Manager subject to appropriate conditions (as outlined below) and subject to the satisfactory completion of the necessary Legal Agreement (final figure for the transport contribution to be agreed).
7.2 CONDITIONS
1. Approved Plan Numbers.
2. The development hereby permitted must be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
3. The scheme shall be implemented in strict accordance with Arboricultural Method Statement dated the 24th February 2016 by PFC Consultancy. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees and shrubs to be retained on site in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
4. No development shall commence until precise details of the finished floor levels of the development in relation to nearby datum points have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.Reason: As this matter is fundamental to control the development in detail in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
5. No development shall commence until full details of means of foul and surface water drainage and sewerage to serve the development have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme agreed shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the agreed details and thereafter maintained as such.Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and in accordance with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
7. No development shall commence until an Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include measures to cover works prior to works commencing, during works and post construction. The approved details shall be implemented in full and in accordance with the agreed timings and details.Reason: As this matter is fundamental to safeguard the ecology and biodiversity of the area in accordance with Policy 25 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
8. No development shall commence until a Lighting Strategy has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The Strategy shall outline measures to reduce impacts on foraging and commuting bats. The approved scheme shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the agreed details and no other forms of external lighting or floodlighting shall at any time be installed within the site. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to safeguard the ecology and biodiversity of the area in accordance with Policy 25 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
9. No development shall commence until a Construction Environmental Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter
Page 21
ITEM A01 - 14
the approved Plan shall be implemented and adhered to throughout the entire construction period. The Plan shall provide details as appropriate but not necessarily be restricted to the following matters:- The anticipated number, frequency and types of vehicles used during construction,- The method of access and routing of vehicles during construction,- The parking of vehicles by site operatives and visitors, - The loading and unloading of plant, materials and waste, - The storage of plant and materials used in construction of the development, - The erection and maintenance of any hoardings, - The provision of wheel washing facilities and other works required to mitigate the
impact of construction upon the public highway (including the provision of temporary Traffic Regulation Orders),
- Details of public engagement both prior to and during construction works,- Details of the working hours agreed with the Local Planning Authority for the
implementation of the development,- A site waste management plan,- Details of any temporary utilities required,- Details of a communication strategy to include the provision of a dedicated phone
line for residents to contact the site manager directly with complaints which should be manned at all times while site works are in progress,
- Details of means of suppressing dust during the construction process to include the regime for dust deposition measurement at the site boundaries,
- Details of the measures to mitigate the noise and vibration from construction traffic and activities.
Reason: As this matter is fundamental in the interests of highway safety and ensuring the free flow of traffic on the highway network; to minimise the risk of damage to the highway; to safeguard the amenity of existing and proposed residents; to safeguard existing landscape features in accordance with Policies 33, 37, 38 and 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
10. No development shall commence until details of the proposed construction methods incorporating sustainable construction techniques to achieve a BREEAM ‘very good’ rating have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter works shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: As this matter is fundamental in the interests of sustainability and in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
11. No development above ground floor slab level of the development hereby permitted shall take place until details of all hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All such works as may be approved shall then be fully implemented in the first planting season, following the completion of works hereby permitted and completed strictly in accordance with the approved details. Any plants or species which within a period of 5 years from the time of planting die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure a satisfactory development and in the interests of amenity in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
12. No development above ground floor slab level of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a schedule and details of external walls and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details and thereafter maintained as such.Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure the visual impact of the proposal in accordance with Policies 25, 26 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
Page 22
ITEM A01 - 15
13. Prior to occupation of the new building hereby permitted, details of the provision for the storage and collection of refuse/recycling bins shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: To ensure the adequate provision of refuse and recycling facilities in accordance with policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
14. Prior to occupation of the new building, a landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibility and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development and in the interests of amenity and nature conservation in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
15. Within three months of the date of first occupation, a Green Travel Plan for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan shall thereafter be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details.Reason: To ensure the promotion of safe, active and sustainable forms of travel and comply with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
16. Within three months of the date of first occupation, a final compliance certificate indicating that the building hereby approved has met a BREEAM rating of ‘very good’ shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
17. Within six months of the date of first occupation, the temporary storage on site, as shown on plan no. FD00001/Rev 9, shall be removed from the site and the relative ground areas restored to their former conditions. Reason: To remove inappropriate structures from the site in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015.
Notes to Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that under Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 disturbance to nesting birds, their nests and eggs is a criminal offence. The nesting season is normally taken as being from 1st March – 30th September. The developer should take appropriate steps to ensure nesting birds, their nests and eggs are not disturbed and are protected until such time as they have left the nest.
2. The applicant is advised to ensure the works comply with Network Rail’s guidance on works adjacent to a railway line: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/1538.aspx.
3. Please note that Southern Water require a formal application for connection to the water supply in order to service this development. Please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House, Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire (tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk.
4. If during development any visibly contaminated or odorous material not previously identified is found to be present at the site, work on site must cease and further advice sought from Local Planning Authority on contaminated land.
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Over five letters of support have been received and the application has been requested to be determined by the Committee by Local Member; Councillor Bradnum
RECOMMENDATION: To refuse planning permission
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
1.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1.1 The application seeks full planning permission for the demolition of a range of buildings including a bothy and greenhouses and their replacement with a dwelling.
1.1.2 Since the application was submitted in October 2014 there have been several amendments to the design of the proposal. A new architect and planning agent were employed in early 2016 and a further scheme was submitted in March 2016. Following continued concerns raised by Officers, a further scheme has been submitted which further reduces the footprint of the proposed dwelling. It is this scheme submitted on 20 May 2016 that is the subject of this report.
1.1.3 The dwelling would provide five bedroom accommodation over two floors, with open plan kitchen/dining/living facilities, separate dining and living rooms, a garden room, utility and cloakroom facilities and four bathrooms/ensuites. There would be gabled projections to the north and south elevations, with half dormers to the north, east and south elevations. The materials proposed will include traditional red brick, much of which will be re-used from the existing buildings, with a tiled roof.
Page 27
Agenda Item 10
ITEM A02 - 2
1.1.4 The proposal will sit on a similar footprint of the existing buildings and has been reduced to include a single storey element from the full two storey dwelling proposed originally. The scheme has been further reduced in size; resulting in a dwelling with a footprint of some 240m² and providing floorspace of some 350m².
1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.2.1 The application site comprises of a number of buildings and structures making up ‘Loder Plants’ which is a nursery on the eastern side of the A281 in the hamlet of Crabtree. The site is accessed via an unmade track off the A281 which also gives access to a number of residential properties located between the application site and the highway.
1.2.2 The application site lies outside of the settlement boundary of Lower Beeding which is approximately 1.6km away and is adjacent to a Historic Park/Garden; the Grade I listed Leonardslee country house estate. It also lies adjacent to the boundary of the Crabtree Conservation Area and the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and close to a number of listed buildings, including Leonardslee itself, which is grade II listed.
1.2.3 In terms of the history of the site the applicant’s agent has advised that the site was a kitchen garden, with the walled garden, bothy and larger greenhouses built around 1852. The site was then used to grow young trees and shrubs along with fruit, vegetables and flowers for use by Leonardslee. The site was then used as a market garden covering 4.5 acres in its heyday from the early 1900’s. The bothy was used by the men who seasonally worked on the estate. Since that date the applicant has been operating a nursery from the site and a number of the buildings and greenhouse structures have fallen into a state of disrepair.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 STATUTORY BACKGROUND
The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2.2 RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2.1 The following sections of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) are relevant to the consideration of this application (Note: This list is not exhaustive and other paragraphs of the Framework are referred to where necessary within the contents of the report):
NPPF6 - Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes NPPF7 - Requiring good design NPPF11 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment NPPF12 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment NPPF14 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development
2.3 RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3.1 Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) – the following policies are of particular relevance:
HDPF25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character HDPF26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection HDPF27 - Strategic Policy: Settlement Coalescence HDPF32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development HDPF33 - Development Principles HDPF34 - Cultural and Heritage Assets HDPF40 - Sustainable Transport HDPF41 - Parking
2.4 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
2.4.1 The Parish of Lower Beeding was designated as a Neighbourhood Development Plan Area on 30 December 2015. The site is not allocated for development.
2.5 PLANNING HISTORY
2.5.1 No recent planning history
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Where consultation responses have been summarised, it should be noted that Officers have had consideration of the full comments received, which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk.
3.2 INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.2.1 Drainage Engineer – “The application form states that the surface water drainage from the proposed development is to be disposed of via soakaways, however no details and sizing of the proposed soakaways have been supplied. The design should be informed by infiltration testing and designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365. Therefore drainage conditions should be applied that ensure the proposed soakaways, for the disposal of surface water drainage, are suitable for the development site and to ensure their design is to a robust standard to minimise the risk of surface water flooding to other buildings and third party land.”
3.2.2 Conservation Officer – Objects to scheme.
3.3 OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.3.1 WSCC Highways – The erection of an additional dwelling at this site should not generate a detriment to the safety or capacity for fellow Highway users. Recommends condition requiring covered and secure cycle parking spaces to be provided.
3.3.2 Southern Water – Should any sewer be found during construction works, an investigation of the sewer will be required to ascertain its condition, the number of properties served, and potential means of access before any further works commence on site.
3.3.3 High Weald AONB Unit – Unable to provide comments.
3.4 PARISH COUNCIL
3.4.1 No objection to the scheme as originally submitted. No comments received on the amended scheme.
3.5.1 Councillor Bradnum – “There is widespread support for this application, including Lower Beeding Parish Council. Although a sensitive site owing to it's close proximity to Leonardslea Gardens, it will utilise redundant buildings and materials and therefore the impact on the surrounding area will be minimised. The new building will be largely hidden from view and I do not raise any objection.”
3.6 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.6.1 27 letters/emails of support have been received to the application as originally submitted which raise the following material considerations: Sympathetic design In keeping with surroundings Enhance the village Protection of site from further decay and dereliction Enhance the adjacent grade I listed garden No impact on neighbouring properties Help to meet need for dwellings in the south east Not feasible to renovate buildings Brownfield site
3.6.2 41 letters/emails of support have been received to the amended scheme submitted in March 2016 (8 from households who supported the original scheme) which raise the following material considerations: Sympathetic design In keeping with surroundings Enhance the village Protection of site from further decay and dereliction Enhance the adjacent grade I listed garden No impact on neighbouring properties Help to meet need for dwellings in the south east Not feasible to renovate buildings Brownfield site No impact on AONB Promote tourism Sustainable use of existing buildings Secure future of nursery Prevent prospect of further subdivision of the estate
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.
Page 30
ITEM A02 - 5
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The main issues in the consideration of this application are: Principle of the development Design of proposal Impact on heritage assets Impact on neighbouring residential properties Highway safety
Principle of development
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and that this should run through both plan-making and decision-taking. In terms of the determination of planning applications this should mean the approval of developments that accord with the development plan without delay, and that where the development plan is silent or relevant policies are out of date, that permission be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, or policies of the NPPF indicate otherwise.
6.3 Policy 2 of the HDPF seeks to maintain the Districts unique rural character whilst ensuring that the needs of the community are met through sustainable growth and suitable access to services and local employment. The spatial strategy to 2031 is to focus development in and around the key settlement of Horsham and allow for growth in the rest of the District in accordance with the identified settlement hierarchy.
6.4 Policy 3 of the HDPF states that development will be permitted within towns and villages which have a defined built-up area. Any infilling and redevelopment will be required to demonstrate that it is of an appropriate nature and scale to maintain characteristics and function of the settlement in accordance with the settlement hierarchy set out within the policy. The applicant’s agent has argued that the site lies “opposite one of the major local employers in the tourism industry in Horsham in South Lodge a short distance to the Crabtree Pub and also benefits from a local bus route within metres of the site” and that “In sustainability terms the location of the site fairs better than other small villages.” The application site however is located outside of any defined built-up area boundary and would therefore be classed as within open countryside where both the NPPF and policies of the HDPF seek to restrict development unless special and exceptional circumstances exist.
6.5 Policy 4 of the HDPF states that the growth of settlements across the district will continue to be supported in order to meet identified local housing, employment and community needs. Outside built up area boundaries, the expansion of settlements will be supported where they meet the requirements stated in the policy. The first is that the site is allocated in the Local Plan or in a neighbourhood plan. The site is located within the Parish of Lower Beeding, which has an approved Neighbourhood Development Plan Area for the parish but no draft plan currently exists for the area that would support the scheme as proposed. In any case, the site is some 1.6km from Lower Beeding which is the closest settlement with a built-up area boundary.
6.6 Policy 15 of the HDPF states that provision is made for the development of at least 16,000 homes and associated infrastructure within the period of 2011-2031. The policy sets out that this figure will be achieved partly through windfall sites. However, any such site would have to accord with the remaining polices with the HDPF, in particular polices 3 and 4, which seek to locate new development in accordance with the settlement hierarchy and within the defined built up areas of settlements.
6.7 The applicant’s agent has advised that he considers that the application could be considered as providing residential development on a brownfield site which the Government seeks to encourage. The applicant’s agent has advised that chapter 4 of the
Page 31
ITEM A02 - 6
HDPF states that “In order to ensure that this growth and change can take place, the policies in this chapter set out a hierarchy in which development can take place, with the priority on locating new homes, jobs, facilities and services at Horsham and where appropriate the smaller towns and villages, particularly through the re-use of previously developed land” and the Council’s definition of ‘previously developed land’ as set out in Appendix 1: Glossary of the HDPF states “Brownfield/ Previously Developed Land (PDL): In the sequential approach this is preferable to Greenfield land. It is land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure (excluding agricultural or forestry buildings), and associated fixed surface infrastructure. The definition covers the curtilage of the development. Previously- developed land may occur in both built-up and rural settings.”
6.8 Whilst the NPPF is supportive of the re-use of brownfield sites, it also seeks to ensure that development is sustainable, new isolated homes in the open countryside are avoided unless special circumstances exist and that the countryside is protected from inappropriate development. Policy 3 of the HDPF supports this stance as it seeks to locate appropriate development, including infilling, redevelopment and conversion within built-up area boundaries, with a focus on brownfield land. As the site is outside of the built-up area boundary of a town or village it would not meet the requirements of Policy 3 of the HDPF. Notwithstanding that the site is outside of any built-up area boundary and therefore does not conform to the spatial strategy as set out in the HDPF, the site is considered to be in a horticultural use which falls under an agricultural use as defined in Section 336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and is not therefore considered to be previously developed land as defined above.
6.9 Policy 20 of the HDPF allows for rural accommodation to support the rural economy and enable people to live close to where they work. The Council acknowledges that there may sometimes be special circumstances where it is essential for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work, where it can be justified to support an established business use. The policy also requires evidence to be submitted to demonstrate the viability of the rural business for which the housing is required. No such information has been submitted. The applicant has advised that “...the present dilapidated dwelling is in the centre of my family business and becoming more of a liability. Until a positive decision can be made, it is hampering any future development and holding back the commercial nursery in its present form. The existing nursery, which is a long-standing family business, is internationally known in horticultural circles. It holds a great deal of information vital to the listed gardens we are all trying to protect. It is leisure and tourism attraction within a countryside setting and could be deemed necessary to ensure the continued sustainable development of this rural site. There are very few of these family businesses still running in a market garden setting. I have also amassed a large collection of historical items from the original estate, and my family would like to give me more, but at present, my home and other buildings I have no space left to accommodate any more. I feel I am a custodian of these items, being part of my family heritage and belonging to my family, therefore, they are not mine to donate but I am in discussion with Horsham Museum, to see if we can do something on site for the future.”
6.10 Whilst it is understood that the buildings the subject of this application are dilapidated and
that the nursery is a long standing operation, no justification for the construction of a new dwelling in this location and to support the needs of the business has been submitted. From the site location plan submitted, it is understood that there are a number of residential properties within the ownership of the applicant including a number that are located along the access track into the nursery site. It is also understood that the applicant currently resides in one of these properties (Market Garden Cottage) which is some 55 metres west of the buildings proposed to be demolished and at the entrance of the nursery site. It is not therefore considered that the proposal meets the requirements of Policy 20 of the HDPF.
Design of proposal and impact on heritage assets
Page 32
ITEM A02 - 7
6.11 Paragraph 56 of the NPPF states that ‘the Government attaches great importance to the design of the building environment. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people.’ Paragraph 60 states that whilst planning decisions should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular tastes it is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness. Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions (paragraph 64). It is considered that the Council’s policies relating to design and character (policies 32 and 33 of the HDPF) are broadly in line with the core principles and policies of the NPPF.
6.12 The site is situated adjacent a grade I listed Historic Park and Garden, the Crabtree Conservation Area and High Weald AONB and there are a number of listed buildings located within the wider setting, including the grade II listed Leonardslee.
6.13 Section 12 of the NPPF deals with conserving and enhancing the historic environment and requires both designated and non-designated heritage assets to be taken into account in determining applications. Paragraph 126 requires recognition that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and conserve them in a manner appropriate to their significance. Paragraph 132 requires when considering the impact that proposed development will have on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight to be given to the asset’s conservation. It states that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. Paragraph 137 goes on to require local planning authorities to look for opportunities for new development within the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance.
6.14 Policy 34 of the HDPF relates to cultural and heritage assets. It states that "The Council recognises that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource, and as such the Council will sustain and enhance its historic environment through positive management of development affecting heritage assets. Applications for such development will be required to: 1. Make reference to the significance of the asset, including drawing from research and documentation such as the West Sussex Historic Environment Record; 2. Reflect the current best practice guidance produced by English Heritage and Conservation Area Character Statements; 3. Reinforce the special character of the district's historic environment through appropriate siting, scale, form and design; including the use of traditional materials and techniques; 4. Make a positive contribution to the character and distinctiveness of the area, and ensuring that development in conservation areas is consistent with the special character of those areas; 5. Preserve, and ensure clear legibility of, locally distinctive vernacular building forms and their settings, features, fabric and materials; 6. Secure the viable and sustainable future of heritage assets through continued preservation by uses that are consistent with the significance of the heritage asset; 7. Retain and improves the setting of heritage assets, including views, public rights of way, trees and landscape features, including historic public realm features; and 8. Ensure appropriate archaeological research, investigation, recording and reporting of both above and below-ground archaeology, and retention where required, with any assessment provided as appropriate."
6.15 The Council’s Conservation Officer has raised concerns with the both the original scheme, amended schemes submitted over the course of the consideration of the application and the amended scheme under consideration. The comments received advise:
“The above site is situated adjacent to a Grade I listed Historic Park and Garden and the Crabtree Conservation Area and there are a number of listed buildings located within the wider setting. With this in mind, the site which is currently occupied with historic buildings and structures which are utilitarian in character and appearance is sensitive to change.
Page 33
ITEM A02 - 8
The proposal to demolish the existing buildings and not work with the structures is regrettable however it is acknowledged that the principle of replacing the existing buildings has already been considered to be acceptable in principle.
While the principle of a replacement building to the site may be acceptable, any proposed development must seek to preserve, enhance and/or better reveal the character and appearance of the site and its wider setting.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the existing buildings have fallen into a poor state of neglect and are now structurally unsound and in redundant use, the scale (including size, height, form and massing) and the architectural detailing to the buildings complements the immediate context and a modest and utilitarian character and appearance should be achieved in any future redevelopment.
The amended drawings show a slight reduction in size to the proposed dwelling and additional glazing has been introduced to the design with cleaner elevation treatment and improved fenestration detailing. However, the scale of the proposed development is still considered too big and unfortunately, the latest proposal is still not considered appropriate.
As previously commented, a replacement building must be of a high quality design which seeks to preserve, enhance and better reveal the setting of the heritage assets; the proposed detached and rather substantial dwelling appears over-sized and bulky and would not preserve the positive characteristics of the existing buildings which whilst have been left to fall into a poor state of dilapidation are very much of a modest and utilitarian appearance.
The bothy and large glass houses allow one to appreciate the historic use of the site and maintain the ‘kitchen garden’ character of the site harmonising with the other greenhouses and ancillary structures.
The proposed large replacement dwelling would be heavy in its visual massing and the bulky volume of the development would result in an unduly prominent building which would be an incongruous addition to the setting.
It appears that the various proposals put forward would maintain the existing footprint which includes both the bothy and the large green houses. This approach is considered inappropriate; the existing footprint is made up of several utilitarian and ancillary single storey and two storey structures and the different structures with differing sizes and varying ancillary uses breaks up the overall visual massing. Furthermore, the large green houses with extensive areas of glazing would have been visually lightweight structures.
For the above reasons, a replacement building of similar scale and modest appearance may be acceptable but the proposed substantial dwelling which would have a commanding presence would detract from the quaint and rural setting.
With the above in mind, it is considered that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the setting contrary to national and local planning legislation, policy and guidance.”
6.16 Give the sites location adjacent to a conservation area, the High Weald AONB, the grade I listed Historic Park and Garden and within the wider setting of a number of listed buildings and the comments of the Council’s Conservation Officer, it is considered that the design of the amended scheme is still not appropriate for the site and should be reduced to a scale similar to that of the existing buildings and structures on the site which have a modest and utilitarian appearance as per the comments of the Council’s Conservation Officer. Officers agree that the dwelling as proposed, despite being reduced to include a large single storey
Page 34
ITEM A02 - 9
element, continues to appear over-sized and bulky, and would result in an unduly prominent building within the site at odds with the existing buildings and structures. The construction of a dwelling as proposed would not, in the opinion of Officers, relate sympathetically with the existing built and natural environment of the locality and rural character of the wider area, and would lead to a detriment impact on the visual amenities of the area and the setting of the heritage assets as detailed above.
Impact on neighbouring residential properties
6.17 The site of the proposed new dwelling in relatively central to the Loder Plants nursery site. The nearest non-related residential properties are located to the west of the application, approximately 60m away. It is not therefore considered that the construction of a dwelling on the site would have an adverse impact on the privacy and amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring residential properties.
Highway safety
6.18 Access to the site is provided via a private access track off the A281. This access also serves a number of residential properties along with the nursery. WSCC highways have raised no objections to the proposal and consider that the erection of an additional dwelling at the site should not result in a material increase in movements associated with the point of access.
Conclusion
6.19 Whilst no concerns are raised in respect of the impact of the construction of a new dwelling on the site on the privacy and amenity of occupiers of neighbouring residential properties or highway safety, it is considered that the proposal fails to provide justification to demonstrate the need for a dwelling in this rural location. In addition, it would be of an inappropriate scale and design that would result in a prominent building at odds with the existing buildings and structures within the nursery site which would not relate sympathetically with the existing built and natural environment of the locality and rural character of the wider area, and would lead to a detriment impact on the visual amenities of the area and the setting of heritage assets, including the adjacent grade I listed Historic Park and Garden, the Crabtree Conservation Area and a number of listed buildings located within the wider setting, including the grade II listed Leonardslee.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 The application is recommended for refusal for the following reasons:
1 The proposed development is located in the countryside, outside the defined built-up area boundary of any settlements, on a site not allocated for development within the Horsham District Planning Framework, or an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. The Council is able to demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply and consequently this scheme would be contrary to the overarching strategy and hierarchical approach of concentrating development within the main settlements. Furthermore the proposed development has not been demonstrated to be essential to its countryside location. Consequently the proposal represents unsustainable development contrary to policies 1, 2, 3, 4 and 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) and would fail to meet the definition of sustainable development within the National Planning Policy Framework.
2 The proposal would result in an unduly prominent building which would be an incongruous addition to its rural setting and the setting of heritage assets, including the adjacent grade I listed Historic Park and Garden, the Crabtree Conservation Area and a
Page 35
ITEM A02 - 10
number of listed buildings located within the wider setting, including the grade II listed Leonardslee, and would not preserve the positive characteristics of the existing buildings and structures on the site. The proposal would therefore be contrary to policies 33 and 34 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), and the advice contained in section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.
Scale:
DC/14/2140
Loder Plants
1:2,870
OrganisationDepartmentComments
Date
MSA Number
Horsham District Council
24/05/2016
100023865
For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public
Page 37
This page is intentionally left blank
ITEM A03 - 1
Contact Officer: Guy Everest Tel: 01403 215633
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee (North)
BY: Development Manager
DATE: 7 June 2016
DEVELOPMENT: Erection of three two storey houses
SITE: The Paddock Micklepage Nuthurst Street Nuthurst
WARD: Nuthurst
APPLICATION: DC/15/2493
APPLICANT: Mr Jackson and Mrs Jarvis
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: More than 5 different households have made written representations which are inconsistent with the Officers’ recommendation
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission is granted.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
1.1 To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.2 The application seeks consent for a development comprising three detached bungalows with additional accommodation within the roofspace. The dwellings would be orientated north / south and would be accessed off and front the existing private access, which runs along the northern boundary of the site. As part of the development the road would be widened with the access onto Nuthurst Street improved to provide greater visibility.
1.3 The development would incorporate front hardstandings with integral garages to provide off-street parking to each dwelling. The main living accommodation would be at ground floor level with three-bedrooms at first floor level (within the roofspace). The dwellings would comprise render at ground floor with timber cladding at first floor level to reflect Micklepage Leigh (which adjoins to the east).
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.4 The application site comprises a paddock within the countryside outside of any defined settlement. The site lies to the east of Nuthurst Street and to the south of an existing private access which serves adjoining development to the north and east. The immediate surrounding area is characterised by linear residential development along Nuthurst Street, with the wider surrounding area predominantly rural in character.
Page 39
Agenda Item 11
ITEM A03 - 2
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 National Planning Policy Framework
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), the following policies are of particular relevance:-
HDPF1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development HDPF2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development HDPF3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy HDPF4 - Strategic Policy: Settlement Expansion HDPF15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision HDPF24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection HDPF25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character HDPF26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection HDPF32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development HDPF33 - Development Principles HDPF37 - Sustainable Construction HDPF38 - Strategic Policy: Flooding HDPF40 - Sustainable Transport HDPF41 - Parking
2.4 The Nuthurst Neighbourhood Plan was ‘made’ in October 2015 and forms part of the development plan. The Neighbourhood Plan allocates development sites within the area for approximately 50 dwellings, Policies 1 (A Spatial Plan), 8 (Land at Micklepage Leigh, Nuthurst) and 12 (Housing Design) are of greatest relevance to the proposal.
2.5 PLANNING HISTORY
N/12/59 Proposed res dev REF N/13/77 Dwelling & garage : outline REF N/30/72 Erection of det bungalow REFN/54/60 Proposed erection of bungalow or 1 house with access REFDC/05/0518 Erection of 2 dwellings REF
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Where consultation responses have been summarised, it should be noted that Officers have had consideration of the full comments received, which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.2 Drainage Engineer: No objection. There appears to be very little drainage information / detail submitted with this application other than a description of a proposal within the Design & Access Statement, which makes reference to culverting an existing ditch and discharging to a local watercourse. Therefore drainage conditions should be applied that
require full details of the measures to dispose of foul and surface water and approaches to mitigate against the possible effects of flooding; Building Regulations dictate an order of priority for the selection of surface water discharge from new developments.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.3 Nuthurst Parish Council: No objection.
3.4 West Sussex County Council - Rights of Way: No objection. The application does not have a direct impact upon the Rights of Way network. However, Footpath 1806, runs on adjoining land adjacent to the development site; it should be noted that any access that is required to the development should not cause any damage to the footpath.
3.5 West Sussex County Council – Highways: No objection following the receipt of a Transport Statement including speed surveys and revised visibility splays at the access onto Nuthurst Road.
3.6 Southern Water: No objection. The exact position of a water main must be determined in site and no excavation should be carried out within 4 metres of the main (without consent from Southern Water).
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.7 Representations have been received from 9 addresses, objecting to the proposal for the following reasons:-
- Design, the dwellings would not be in harmony with the village or surrounding houses;- Overdevelopment, applications have previously been refused for a dwelling on the site;- The access arrangement will obstruct adjoining resident’s right of way and access;- The site is situated on a bend and the proposal would create a safety hazard;- There is poor infrastructure in this location;- The existing drainage provision could not accommodate additional development.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The key issues of considerations in the determination of this application are:-
whether the proposal complies with the spatial strategy set out within the adopted Horsham District Planning Framework and the adopted Nuthurst Parish Neighbourhood Plan;
the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area;
Page 41
ITEM A03 - 4
the impact of the proposal on neighbouring amenity; the effect of the proposal on highway safety.
Principle of development
6.2 The application site is located within a cluster of dwellings on Nuthurst Street, south of the main village of Nuthurst. The site, and surrounding area, falls outside of any defined settlement boundary. Policy 3 of the HDPF identifies a development hierarchy. Nuthurst is not listed in any of the categories and therefore falls within the tier ‘unclassified settlements’, which are described as settlements with few or no facilities, or social networks and limited accessibility that are reliant on other villages and towns to meet the needs of residents.
6.3 Policy 4 of the HDPF states that outside of built-up area boundaries, the expansion of settlements will be supported where amongst other criteria, the site is allocated in the Local Plan or in a Neighbourhood Plan and adjoins an existing settlement edge. The Nuthurst Parish Neighbourhood Plan allocates the application site, through policy 8, for ‘a housing scheme that may comprise three dwellings’, the policy also states that the scheme should comprise 2 and 3 bedroom houses or bungalows and access should be from the existing lane serving Micklepage Leigh.
6.4 The application site reflects the extent of the allocation within the Neighbourhood Plan with the proposed development comprising 3 x 3-bed chalet bungalows accessed from the existing lane. The scale and nature of the proposed development therefore complies with the Neighbourhood Plan and as such there is no conflict with the strategic approach to settlement expansion set out in Policy 4.
Character and appearance
6.5 The proposed development would entail three chalet bungalows set at a right angle to Nuthurst Street. While this would contrast with the siting of adjoining development which directly fronts the highway it is a function of utilising the existing access road, as required by the Neighbourhood Plan. The proposed site layout would reflect the siting and orientation of buildings which form part of Micklepage and this approach is therefore considered acceptable.
6.6 The proposed dwellings would incorporate accommodation within the roofspace in the manner of a chalet bungalow. This approach reduces the scale of the buildings and accords with the design approach outlined in the Neighbourhood Plan. The resulting buildings would reflect the scale and form of immediately adjoining development to the south, i.e. Winthrift (which incorporates a substantial gabled roof form with front and rear dormers), and would not appear unduly dominant or incongruous in long or short views along Nuthurst Street.
6.7 The development, while introducing a uniformity which is not particularly characteristic of the locality, would have a mock-traditional form and appearance which would reflect surrounding development and would be acceptable in this location. The proposed materials, of render and timber cladding to the walls with a tiled roof, would reflect existing buildings in the locality and are therefore considered acceptable in principle; further details are secured through condition.
6.8 The proposed dwellings would not require the removal of existing trees on the adjoining site which, although not protected by TPO, make a positive contribution to the visual amenities of the area. A condition is recommended to secure details of protection measures to ensure they can be retained post-development. There is potential for
Page 42
ITEM A03 - 5
additional landscaping to the south and western boundaries to supplement the retained trees and an appropriate scheme is required through condition.
6.9 It is therefore considered that the proposal, having regard to the Neighbourhood Plan, would not harm the prevailing character or appearance of the locality, in compliance with policies 32 and 33 of the HDPF.
Impact on amenity
Neighbouring residents
6.10 The proposed dwellinghouses would be a sufficient distance from neighbouring properties to prevent any harmful loss of light or outlook to adjoining window openings and outdoor amenity space.
6.11 The orientation of the proposed dwellings would create additional overlooking toward the adjoining property to the south, Winthrift, primarily from the central dwelling (‘House 2’). There would though be approximately 32 metres between the proposed first floor window openings and northern boundary of Winthrift, with the separation marked by an access to an adjoining paddock and an intermittent line of trees. This arrangement would be sufficient to ensure that the resulting views would not be unduly harmful or intrusive. It should also be noted that the additional landscaping sought through condition, to include means of enclosure, would further mitigate any new overlooking toward this property.
Future occupants
6.12 The development would provide 3 x 3-bed dwellinghouses with adequate room sizes, natural light and ventilation throughout. The proposed layout would provide south facing private amenity space to each dwelling of a size which reflects the scale and nature of the development. The siting of adjoining trees would not impinge on light to either the dwellings or associated outdoor space.
Impact on Highways
6.13 The development would be accessed from the existing road which serves adjoining dwellings to the east of the site. There is no objection to this arrangement, which accords with the Neighbourhood Plan.
6.14 In response to comments from the Highway Authority a speed survey was undertaken which demonstrates that adequate visibility can be provided at the junction of the access road with Nuthurst Street. A condition is recommended to ensure the visibility splays, and associated improvements to the proposed access, are completed prior to commencement of construction works for the dwellings.
6.15 The proposed layout would provide sufficient on-site parking for each dwelling, with details of hard landscaping required by condition, and the proposal would not result in a harmful level of displaced parking to the adjoining highway. The neighbouring concerns regarding the proposed access and parking arrangement are acknowledged; however, given the comments from the Highway Authority it is not anticipated that the proposal would create a safety hazard for users of adjoining highways.
6.16 There is sufficient space within the curtilage of each dwelling to provide cycle parking facilities and further details are sought through condition.
Page 43
ITEM A03 - 6
Other considerations
6.17 A number of representations have been received objecting to the application due to flooding / drainage concerns. The Design & Access Statement includes reference to culverting an existing ditch and discharging to a local watercourse. The Council’s Drainage Engineer has raised no objection in principle to this arrangement, and it is considered that this approach would ensure that any runoff generated by the development would be captured and managed on site. A condition is recommended to secure further details prior to the commencement of development.
6.18 In respect of objections relating to issues in Nuthurst Street, i.e. roadside gullies / land drains, it is understood that, following consultation with the Highway Authority, works have been undertaken to deepen ditches around the site and to clean pipes under the road. There is no evidence to suggest the proposed development would worsen existing conditions in the locality and the Highway Authority has raised no objection in this regard.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 That planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:
1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2 No extension, enlargement, alteration or provision within the curtilage of the of the dwellinghouse as provided for within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B and F of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) other than that expressly authorised by this permission shall be carried out without planning permission obtained from the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: The Local Planning Authority considers that further development could cause detriment to the character of the area and to the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties and for this reason would wish to control any future development proposals to comply with policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
3 No work for the implementation of the development hereby permitted shall be undertaken on the site except between 08.00 hours and 18.00 hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive and 08.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of nearby residents in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
4 No burning of materials in conjunction with the development shall take place on the site.
Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
5 No development shall be commenced unless and until a schedule of materials and samples of such materials and finishes and colours to be used for external walls and
Page 44
ITEM A03 - 7
roofs of the proposed building(s) have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used shall conform to those approved.
Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
6 No development shall commence until full details of means of surface water drainage to serve the development have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall ensure that any runoff from impermeable surfaces within the development is captured and managed on site. The development shall take place in accordance with the agreed details and be maintained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
7 No development shall commence until full details of existing and proposed ground levels (referenced as Ordinance Datum) within the site and on land and buildings adjoining the site by means of spot heights and cross-sections, proposed siting and finished floor levels of all buildings and structures, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved level details.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of nearby properties and to safeguard the character and appearance of the area, in addition to comply with policies 32 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
8 No development shall commence until a tree protection scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the erection of fences for the protection of trees, the retention of fences until the completion of the development, and shall ensure that no vehicles, plant or materials shall be driven or placed within the areas enclosed by such fences. The development shall take place in accordance with the agreed tree protection plan.
Reason: To ensure the protection of trees which are to be retained on the site in the interest of the visual amenities of the area and to comply with policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
9 The hereby approved improvements to the access road to the north of the site, including the junction arrangement onto Nuthurst Street, shall be completed in accordance with drawing no. PM. 27. The access and road shall be retained in accordance with the approved drawing unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
10 Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, a scheme for landscaping shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the following:
a. details of all hard surfacing; b. details of all boundary treatments;c. details of all proposed planting, including numbers and species of plant,
particularly to the southern boundary of the site; andd. details of size and planting method of any trees.
Page 45
ITEM A03 - 8
All hard landscaping and means of enclosure shall be completed in accordance with the approved scheme prior to first occupation of the development. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenities of the area and to comply with policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
11 The hereby approved dwellinghouse shall not be occupied until on-site car parking has been provided in accordance with the approved plans. The spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated purpose.
Reason: To provide car-parking space for the use and to prevent obstructions on adjoining highways and to comply with policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
12 Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, details of secure cycle parking facilities for the occupants of the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory facilities for the parking of cycles are provided and to encourage travel by means other than private motor vehicles and to comply with policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).
![[XLS] · Web view90 01403 2783.78 00763000 91900 60500 31400 WHATZHISNAME, INC 27 WORMAN RD STOCKTON 08559 78 WALL ST 424236 91 578.17 00774000 37400 31500 GREENE, WENDY D 58 WALL](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5b81e1e57f8b9a32738d61aa/xls-web-view90-01403-278378-00763000-91900-60500-31400-whatzhisname-inc.jpg)
![Pensacola Journal. (Pensacola, Florida) 1909-09-19 [p 12].ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/00/07/59/11/01403/00652.pdftomorrow addresses awgular wonder-ful Hwsee EUCHRE thought doctored](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5ae7e0e37f8b9acc268f45eb/pensacola-journal-pensacola-florida-1909-09-19-p-12-addresses-awgular-wonder-ful.jpg)
